1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 249 F.Supp.
  5. 249 F.Supp. 778 (1965)
 

R. H. MACY & COMPANY v. TINLEY

Civ. A. No. 2707-65.

249 F.Supp. 778 (1965)

R. H. MACY & COMPANY, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Wilmer L. TINLEY et al., Defendants.

United States District Court District of Columbia.

As Amended February 17, 1966.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

William Simon, J. Wallace Adair, Howrey, Simon, Baker & Murchison, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.

David G. Bress, U. S. Atty. for District of Columbia, Joseph M. Hannon, Gil Zimmerman, Asst. U. S. Attys. for District of Columbia, for defendants.

CORCORAN, District Judge.

I.

Having grounds to believe that woolen sweaters manufactured in Italy and imported into the United States were mislabeled as to their mohair content, the Federal Trade Commission (herein the Commission) commenced an investigation to determine whether or not such sweaters were being imported in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 68-68j).

The Commission conducted an industry-wide investigation...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases